Search

Major depressive disorder affects one in five adults in the United States. While practice guidelines recommend universal screening for depression in primary care settings, clinical outcomes suffer in the absence of optimal models to manage those who screen positive for depression. The current practice of employing additional mental health professionals perpetuates the assumption that primary care providers (PCP) cannot effectively manage depression, which is not feasible, due to the added costs and shortage of mental health professionals. We have extended our previous work, which demonstrated similar treatment outcomes for depression in primary care and psychiatric settings, using measurement-based care (MBC) by developing a model, called Primary Care First (PCP-First), that empowers PCPs to effectively manage depression in their patients. This model incorporates health information technology tools, through an electronic health records (EHR) integrated web-application and facilitates the following five components: (1) Screening (2) diagnosis (3) treatment selection (4) treatment implementation and (5) treatment revision. We have implemented this model as part of a quality improvement project, called VitalSign6, and will measure its success using the Reach, Efficacy, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. In this report, we provide the background and rationale of the PCP-First model and the operationalization of VitalSign6 project. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Insomnia is prevalent in adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) and is a key diagnostic criterion of MDD; however, little is understood about the burden of insomnia symptom severity in MDD. We evaluated the relationship between insomnia symptom severity and the clinical, economic, and patient‐centric burden among community‐dwelling individuals with MDD. Methods: Respondents with diagnosed depression who reported insomnia symptoms in the past 12 months (N = 4402) were identified from the 2019 United States National Health and Wellness Survey. Multivariable analyses assessed the association of Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) with health‐related outcomes while controlling for sociodemographic and health characteristics. Further analyses also controlled for depression severity (9‐item Patient Health Questionnaire). Results: Mean ISI score was 14.3 ± 5.6. Higher ISI was associated with greater depression severity (r =.51, p <.001). After adjustments, a one‐standard deviation (5.6‐point) increase in ISI score was significantly associated with higher depression (rate ratio [RR] = 1.36), anxiety (RR = 1.33) and daytime sleepiness (RR = 1.16) levels, more healthcare provider (RR = 1.13) and emergency room visits (RR = 1.31), hospitalizations (RR = 1.21), work productivity and activity impairment (RRs = 1.27 and 1.23, respectively), and poorer mental and physical health‐related quality of life (β = −3.853 and −1.999, respectively) (p <.001). These findings remained statistically significant when controlling for concurrent depression severity. Conclusion: In adults with MDD, greater insomnia symptom severity is associated with worse health‐related outcomes, which suggests the importance of addressing insomnia symptoms as a clinical target for treating MDD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although insomnia is a common core symptom of major depressive disorder (MDD), the burden of moderate-to-severe insomnia symptoms in patients with MDD is not well-understood. This study quantified the clinical, patient-centric, and economic burden of adults with MDD with moderate-to-severe insomnia symptoms (MDDIS) compared to adults with MDD with no-to-mild insomnia symptoms (other-MDD) and adults without MDD. Data from 2019 US National Health and Wellness Survey identified adults self-reporting physician-diagnosed depression, stratified by insomnia status (MDDIS: Insomnia Severity Index [ISI] score ≥15; other-MDD: ISI score <15), and adults not reporting depression (non-MDD). Other-MDD and non-MDD were matched 2:1 to MDDIS on age/sex/race. Matched bivariate analyses examined differences in health-related outcomes by depression-insomnia status. Of 74,994 survey respondents, 2045 (2.7%) were classified as MDDIS, 8220 (11.0%) as other-MDD, and 59,859 (79.8%) as non-MDD. MDDIS respondents (vs other-MDD and non-MDD) reported greater depression severity, anxiety severity, daytime sleepiness, activity impairment, direct costs, and costs due to work productivity impairments, and lower mental and physical functioning (all P < 0.05). Depression diagnosis was not based on clinical/diagnostic interview; causal relationships cannot be determined due to the cross-sectional design. Among US adults with MDD, presence of moderate-to-severe insomnia symptoms is associated with additional burden and notable impairments across several health outcomes versus those with MDD but no-to-minimal insomnia symptoms and general population without MDD. This study highlights the burden of MDDIS and the need for better identification and management of moderate-to-severe insomnia symptoms in adults with MDD. • This study quantifies the burden of MDD with moderate-to-severe insomnia (MDDIS) • Higher depressive, anxiety, and daytime sleepiness symptoms in adults with MDDIS • Higher direct costs and work productivity impairment costs in adults with MDDIS • Lower mental and physical functioning in adults with MDDIS • Burden of MDDIS was significant even when controlling for other depressive symptoms [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One in three adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) do not experience clinically significant improvement after multiple sequential courses of antidepressants and have treatment-resistant depression (TRD). The presence of TRD contributes to the morbidity and excess mortality associated with MDD and has been linked to significantly increased health care expenses. In the absence of a consensus definition of TRD, this report takes a broad approach by considering inadequate response to one or more courses of antidepressants and focuses on atypical antipsychotics that are approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for treatment of depression (aripiprazole, brexpiprazole, cariprazine, extended-release quetiapine, and olanzapine-fluoxetine combination). While multiple acute-phase studies have demonstrated the efficacy of these medications in improving depressive symptoms, clinically meaningful improvement (i.e., remission) remains limited, with significant concerns about side effects (including weight gain, metabolic dysfunction, extrapyramidal symptoms, and tardive dyskinesia), especially with long-term use. With the rapidly evolving landscape of antidepressant treatments over the past few years, which has witnessed approval of rapid-acting antidepressants (e.g., esketamine nasal spray and dextromethorphan-bupropion combination) and several more in the late-stage pipeline (e.g., zuranolone and psilocybin), it remains to be seen whether the use of atypical antipsychotics will go the way of the older and rarely prescribed antidepressants (such as tricyclics and monoamine oxidase inhibitors). Pragmatic clinical trials are needed to compare the effectiveness of atypical antipsychotics with TRD-specific pharmacotherapies and neuromodulation treatments and to identify the optimal sequencing of these varied approaches for patients with MDD. When using atypical antipsychotics, clinicians and patients are encouraged to use a shared decision-making approach by personalizing treatment selection based on anticipated side effects, tolerability, cost, and feasibility.

Purpose: This report describes outcomes of an ongoing quality-improvement project (VitalSign6) in a large US metropolitan area to improve recognition, treatment, and outcomes of depressed patients in 16 primary care clinics (6 charity clinics, 6 federally qualified health care centers, 2 private clinics serving low-income populations, and 2 private clinics serving patients with either Medicare or private insurance)., Methods: Inclusion in this retrospective analysis was restricted to the first 25,000 patients (aged ≥12 years) screened with the 2-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2) in the aforementioned quality-improvement project. Further evaluations with self-reports and clinician assessments were recorded for those with positive screen (PHQ-2 >2). Data collected from August 2014 though November 2016 were available at 3 levels: (1) initial PHQ-2 (n = 25,000), (2) positive screen (n = 4,325), and (3) clinician-diagnosed depressive disorder with 18 or more weeks of enrollment (n = 2,160)., Results: Overall, 17.3% (4,325/25,000) of patients screened positive for depression. Of positive screens, 56.1% (2,426/4,325) had clinician-diagnosed depressive disorder. Of those enrolled for 18 or more weeks, 64.8% were started on measurement-based pharmacotherapy and 8.9% referred externally. Of the 1,400 patients started on pharmacotherapy, 45.5%, 30.2%, 12.6%, and 11.6% had 0, 1, 2, and 3 or more follow-up visits, respectively. Remission rates were 20.3% (86/423), 31.6% (56/177), and 41.7% (68/163) for those with 1, 2, and 3 or more follow-up visits, respectively. Baseline characteristics associated with higher attrition were: non-white, positive drug-abuse screen, lower depression/anxiety symptom severity, and younger age., Conclusion: Although remission rates are high in those with 3 or more follow-up visits after routine screening and treatment of depression, attrition from care is a significant issue adversely affecting outcomes., (© 2019 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc.)